Mid-2000's Explosion 145 ??

[gregnw44]

Hi,
I just bought a Mistral Explosion 145L... it's a (big) shortboard. It's blue and white... and from a brief search on the web, it might be from about '04 - '06?

I'm 200lbs and have been windsurfing a long time. I sail lots of different longboards (raceboards) and also have a FW... and several shortboards. I use sails from 11M to 3.5M size. I sailed my 11M on a raceboard, a few days ago... and my 4.5 on a 85L board 2 weeks ago.

I have a lot of background with certain eras of windsurfing gear... but don't know much about - short, wide boards, this size, from these years.

So, I'm curious about any memories... or personal knowledge... or mag. tests... with info about this board !!
Does anyone know for sure, what year it is (I'll post a pic soon, if I can) ??

I haven't had a chance to sail it yet (not the right wind, since I've had it).

And depending on what it's best at... I "might" keep it... or I might sell it.
But I want to know "who" it's best for... and what kind of sailing it's best at !!
Construction... performance... weight... durability... fun... recreational slalom racing... teaching people waterstarts or jibing... etc.
What are it's "pros and cons"?

Lots of questions, I know... but I'll be happy to learn whatever I can, LOL

Thanks, Greg

[gregnw44]

Here's a pic of the same model board, from the web.
This is not mine... but it looks exactly like the board and fin I have.
Thanks, Greg -

[gvogelsang]

Put the straps in the outboard settings, and it looks like you have a board in between your Formula board, and the smaller ones.

Probably a nice board for 7.5 - 8.5 or so, cruising and easy sailing.

Enjoy.

[d0uglass]

User-friendly jack-of-all-trades freeride board. At the time mistral had three lines of freeride boards:

Screamer, which was a fast slalom-oriented freeride board.
Syncro, which was a freestyle-wave oriented freeride board.
Explosion, which was floaty and forgiving but pretty fast when powered and pretty nice to jibe.

Yours should be good for 6.0 - 8.5. As I recall my only slight complaint was that it didn't go upwind all that great when trying to use it with an 8.5 in marginal planing conditions.

[gregnw44]

Thanks a lot... I appreciate the time!!
Very helpful info.

This board (145L) seems heavy to me. It's certainly heavier than my Starboard FW (159L, I think)... they're both from about 2005-ish.

There is a repair - patch, about the size of your hand, on the starboard rail of the Explosion about halfway down... like somebody was carrying it and dropped it on a rock. The repair and paint job seem decent.
Anyway, I don't really know what caused the damage.
But maybe it's heavy cause it took on some water?
The guy I bought it from owned it for many years.
I think he bought it from the original owner, which was a shop in the Gorge, using it as a rental. The damage and repair probably happened when it was a rental.

Or maybe it just seems heavy cause it's made very durable... heavy-duty construction? Did they make different versions of this board? A light, fragile, and more expensive model... and a heavy, durable and cheaper version?

Or maybe it's not fair to compare the weight of this (smaller) board to a (bigger) FW... since I know the FW is VERY fragile and light.
I'm just surprised... cause I "thought" most all modern shortboards, were very light.

Thanks again for any insight and perspective about this board. I like history... and it's interesting to try and figure out the "story" of this board.
Greg

[jingebritsen]

we tested this board in florida. the heavy versions were a bit noticeable in their performance, but these boards were not appreciated by their distributor in the USA. sad, because they were all superb.

fins were oriented for early planing and light wind. put a stiffer one in and OMG, fantastic esp the pro models.

[gregnw44]

Thanks a lot... It's very helpful to me... I like the detailed background !!
And yeah... mine, must NOT be the pro model, it's certainly too heavy for that
It's exactly the same as the pic I posted above... I haven't seen any pics on-line, that show the graphics of the light version.

I did see weight specs on-line for my board, which said 8.9Kg (19.6 lbs.) and mine is way heavier.

There's a spec label printed on the deck, down between all the foot-straps, it doesn't list the weight, but does say...
Explosion 145
HRS sandwich
L 249cm / 8'2"
W 77cm / 30.3"
Vol 145L
Then I measured it... and got the same width. But I measured it an inch (or 2.5 cm) shorter in length. No big deal, close enough.

Weight - as I mentioned before, it is heavy. I weighed it with it's 4 stock original footstraps (no fin) and I got 25.2 lbs. Which seems too heavy for a modern shortboard.

Here's the weight of the Mistral Explosion 145L compared to some of my other boards... weighed on the same day, same scale... all without fins, but with straps.

2005 Starboard Formula 160 L (with 5 straps) = 19.2 lbs.
2005 Mistral Expolsion 145 L (with 4 straps) = 25.2 lbs.
1994 Bic Rock freeride 140 L (with 4 straps) = 22.2 lbs.
2000 RRD 286 Freeride 117 L (with 4 straps) = 16.7 lbs.

First, I'm bummed my Explosion weighs so much more than the spec I found on-line.
25.2 lbs. compared to 19.6 lbs.
Yes, I know the 19.6 weight is without straps. Still, if I take off a 2 lbs. for the straps, it's still about 4 lbs. over the on-line spec. That's a lot for a board with only 145L of volume.

Secondly, a huge surprise... my 2005 Explosion with 145L weighs 3 lbs. more than my early 90's Bic Rock that has 140L of volume. I bought the Rock new. It was not a light board at the time. The same size Mistral and Fanatic and F2 boards at the time, were much lighter. However, the Rock was cheaper and more durable.
Fast forward to the mid-2000's... and I thought most all shortboards were quite light. I'm VERY surprised this Mistral Explosion is so much heavier than an old Rock, both about the same size!!

Is there a reason for this?

Seems like not very good build quality to me... or bad control of the materials used... I'm sure this is NOT what Mistral intended.

I'd thought about using this Explosion for lightwind sport fleet slalom racing, when the wind is between 10-20 mph. But at this weight... I think I might sell it... and just keep using my FW and old Rock for those conditions.
What do YOU think ??
Greg -
PS - And no... at this time... I don't want to buy a different used, but very light weight and fragile "big" slalom board of 145L for $500.
I got the Explosion for cheap, and can sell it for cheap. I'll be happy enough to stay with the FW and old Rock for those conditions.

[Ugly_Bird]

[gregnw44]

Awesome Andrei (and the other helpful replies) I appreciate your time, thoughts, and input !!

I'm looking forward to getting this big shortboard out for some sailing.
I think it's high weight will keep it from performing the way it could, if it were 4 to 5# lighter (which would still be heavier, than other contemporary boards it's size). But still, I'm still anxious to try it out.

I didn't pay much for it, and can get my $ back out of it later... if I decide to stay with my older, lighter, comparable boards.
Thanks again, Greg

[dllee]

Keep it for lazy days or when teaching a beginner to shortboard.
I have a similar board, a '12 Shark 145 at 78 wide, around 20 lbs with straps, possibly a pound more.
It's OK, good for beginner shortboarders, I use it as a SUP board mainly.
Get this.... my 11 lbs JP Slalom 84, 55 cm wide, planes up EARLIER, and goes way faster, with a 6 meter sail in breezes of 17-20 mph.